Skip to main content

About your Search

English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
against chuck hagel. what is it about is? is it for show? is it about something hagel said in the cloakroom? is it the unfairness of vietnam itself that some went and sond didn't. is it about johnson's inability to win that war or end it. what burns so deeply in john mccain these days? it seems to excite those who knew nothing about vietnam but want to replay it. we big into the deep well of resentment purning in john mccain's patriotic heart. a resentment not against the north vietnamese who imprisoned and tr toured him all those years, no the against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stain mccain's reputation back in 2000, but against a guy who fought against fear and ralliesed against wounds just like he did in the same army of america's long nightmare in vietnam, chuck hagel. a nightmare by the way whose flashbacks must haunt still the mind and hart of john sidney mccain. i'm joined by david con and joy reid. both of you, sir and lady, are younger than me but i'm convinced we're watching a flashback. watch this. here is senator john mccain. did he a
to new taxes. other than that, they're divided by chuck hagel and a legislative and pr strategy for dealing with the sequester, divided about immigration, divided to some extent about just the general posture towards the president. and i think you see in that poll, you know, you say who's the republican party unpopular with? to some extent obviously with democrats. but the reason the number's down so low is a lot of republicans are unhappy with the party. some from the right and some from the left. i think right now the president and his team are firing on all cylinders on the pr war leading up to the sequester. and republicans have put themselves in a weakened position. a lot of long-term issues as well. >> when your brand is in the 20s, you're in harry truman and george w. bush territory. it's just not good. and you know, the president is winning the day on a lot of issues, especially when it comes to dealing with gun violence. if you look at the poll, overwhelmingly, americans think that this country needs stricter gun laws. that obviously is an offshoot of not only newtown b
nomination than was chuck hagel the week before. he was far more confident, far more informed, authoritative. but this is the first time it was ever debated, the subject. i mean it's gone undebated. and i have to concede that much of the criticism, i think from conservative press is absolutely valid. if this were george w. bush and dick cheney and we had increased by sixfold the number of unmanned attacks on other countries that are not combatant countries, that were not at war with, there would have been far more hue and cry. and it is interesting that the president, the only criticism in the president seems to be among a few liberals, and the support seems to be from people like john bolton-- and so it's a debate i think we have to have, we should have and it's been cloaked in secrecy and secrecy is the sacrosanct secular religion of this city. >> woodruff: so this has stirred it up? >> i think so, because of the leaked memo and the system, we are having a debate about drones. and i guess if i want a drone policy i want it run by a franciscan, not a jesuit. but he didn't really defend it,
to approve chuck hagel for defense secretary. the party line vote on the former senator was 14-11. his fellow republicans challenged hagel's past statements and votes on israel, iraq and iran's nuclear weapons program, while democrats argued hagel was more than qualified. >> i just believe that the testimony of senator hagel was not reassuring. i don't think he did come across clear and convincing, that he understood our policies toward iran. and the fact that you don't understand why and you can't clearly articulate the bad news for america for the iranians' nuclear capability sharply and to the point is unnerving and for the times in which we live. >> the concern that i have is the suggestion that this man who has served his country really since he was a young man and enlisted in vietnam is not qualified to be the secretary of defense. i think it's just not accurate and reflects certainly a different understanding of his background and his experience than i have. >> sreenivasan: democrats want a full senate vote later this week, but republicans could delay it. the federal government ran a b
will have its vote on the nomination of former senator chuck hagel to be secretary of defense. we will see that at 2:30 this afternoon live on c-span3. you can also find that on our website, we're asking you whether stated the union addresses matter. our next caller is in des moines on our independent lineh independenti, doug. caller: good morning. i agree with some of the previous callers stating that we are going to hear a lot of what we have already heard from the president. one of the things i would like to hear is something maybe the republicans can address, is we give all these illegal immigrants citizenship, when happens? does that not just incur more costs? if they're not able to find a job, then they're on a social program. along the same lines, what type of jobs are they going to have that will start generating more revenue for the government? i feel like it will just cause more problems for the economy and more spending to take care of more citizens. host: mary in mississippi, republican. caller: hi. i would just like to commend the 12-year-old boy that called. it's
questions about defense secretary nominee chuck hagel. this is 45 minutes. >> good afternoon. happy friday. i have no announcements, i will go straight to questions. you probably have in your inbox, statements from the president on departure.o- chu's he is thanks for his -- he brought a unique understanding on the urgent challenge augmented by -- presented by climate change. during his time as secretary, he held my administration move america from real energy independence. we have doubled the use of renewable energy, dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil. you can read the full statement at your leisure. i will go to questions >> does the president considered the attack in turkey to be a terrorist attack? >> a suicide bombing on the perimeter of an embassy is, by definition, an act of terror. we do not know at this point who is responsible or the motivations behind the attack. the attack itself is clearly an act of terror. >> the birth control -- is this recognition that the initial rules were an overreach? >> not at all. for details about the rulemaking process on which there
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)